(*group of Republicans selected by randomly selecting non-Republicans)Here are some of the questions:
Do you support President douchebag's initiatives to promote the safgety and security of all Americans?
Should the Inheritance or "Death Tax" be permanently repealed?
Do you support president clusterfuck's pro-growth policies to create more jobs and improve the economy?
Do you agree that teaching our children to read and increasing literacy rates should be a national priority?
Should students, teachers, principals and administrators be held to higher standards?
Do you support President head-up-his-ass's initiative to allow private religious and charitable groups to do more to help those in need?
Do you think US troops should have to serve under United Nations' commanders?
...And then of course, they asked for money...
--------------------------
The only thing I wrote on it before I returned it was:This "survey" is as disingenuous as the Bush Administration, and demonstrates just how little the RNC is willing to change.
― dave225 (Dave225), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 18:46 (twenty years ago)
― dave225 (Dave225), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 18:48 (twenty years ago)
― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 18:51 (twenty years ago)
― known vaginatarian (nickalicious), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 19:05 (twenty years ago)
― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 19:11 (twenty years ago)
― dave225 (Dave225), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 19:14 (twenty years ago)
"We have identified five key areas for action for the next Conservative government. In your view, which one thing would make the biggest difference to:a) Crime: More police / Tougher sentences / More CCTVb) Schools: Cut teachers' paperwork / Fewer exams / Stronger discipline policiesc) Hospitals: More new hospitals / Cleaner hospitals / More nursing staffd) Immigration: An annual limit / ID cards / 24-hour surveillance at portse) Tax: Scrap inheritance tax / Raise higher rate thresholds / Double Stamp Duty threshold"
Note how *all* the policies you get to choose from are favoured Tory ones - particularly, you get to pick which of three tax-the-rich-less policies you'd prefer.
― caitlin (caitlin), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 21:42 (twenty years ago)
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 21:46 (twenty years ago)
― caitlin (caitlin), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 21:54 (twenty years ago)
xpost
― DougD, Wednesday, 9 February 2005 21:55 (twenty years ago)
― Kingfish MuffMiner 2049er (Kingfish), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 22:04 (twenty years ago)
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 22:08 (twenty years ago)
― caitlin (caitlin), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 22:09 (twenty years ago)
― DougD, Wednesday, 9 February 2005 22:28 (twenty years ago)
― Allyzay Dallas Multi-Pass (allyzay), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 23:16 (twenty years ago)
― Kingfish MuffMiner 2049er (Kingfish), Wednesday, 9 February 2005 23:19 (twenty years ago)
anyhow one thing that cracks me up about this is that even in literature to themselves, to the followers, they still have to be coy about what they mean, that even in a republican mailing by and large the have to hide the policy in vague 'do you like charity: yes or no' or 'should the govt waste yr money: yes or no' or 'should america be defended: yes or no', even the one time they show their cards sorta 'should partial birth abortions be legal: yes or no' it's still a way of them avoiding 'should abortion be legal: yes or no', republicans know that their policy and their actual ideology is still unpopular by and large. even with the alito debate, which the right painted as finally abortion put on the table, we finally had the debate out in the open, their guy couldn't say 'yes, you're damn right i'd overturn roe v. wade, it's bad law and abortion should be illegal' they still had to cloak themselves.
― j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 00:17 (nineteen years ago)
― gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 00:31 (nineteen years ago)
― j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 00:37 (nineteen years ago)
I get shit in the mail from liberal causes, too. But I'm pretty sure that's a result of the Sierra Club and Trout Unlimited selling me down the river.
― don weiner (don weiner), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 01:59 (nineteen years ago)
― gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 02:15 (nineteen years ago)
― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 02:23 (nineteen years ago)
I get calls periodically from the NRA, especially during election years, also probably because of my zip code. The operator would ask if she could play a recorded message from Wayne LaPierre or whomever and then get my reaction. The message would be something along the lines of "Why do politicians want to infiltrate our homes and take our guns away?" The operator would come back on and ask if I strongly agree, agree, was undecided, disagree, or strongly disagree with the comment or question. The one time that I bothered to stick around to answer, I said that I strongly disagreed ("Put me down for that one!"), and the operator said thank you, goodbye, *click*. I get the feeling that if I had answered anything undecided or better, I may have been able to stick around and get an autographed Chuck Heston photo.
― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 05:34 (nineteen years ago)